In an interview back in March, io9 asked Dawn of the Planet of the Apes star Andy Serkis about the advancements in WETA’s digital work when it comes to turning his performance capture work into characters such as King Kong, Gollum and now Caesar in Apes. “It’s a given that they absolutely copy [the performance] to the letter, to the point in effect what they are doing is painting digital makeup onto actors’ performances.” Serkis said.
Of course, with yet another masterful turn in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, the chanting for an Oscar nomination for Serkis is bound to begin sooner rather than later, only this time around it may have been stopped in its tracks.
Speaking with The Wrap, WETA’s Joe Letteri, visual effects supervisor on Dawn of the Apes, addressed this idea of “digital makeup” head on saying, “I know that Andy has used that metaphor of digital makeup before, but I think that he was just trying to explain it to an audience that was not technically very savvy. The difference is that makeup is passive. And the more makeup you put on, the more it actually deadens the performance. [Which is why] we sometimes need to enhance the performance. So yes, we do make those sorts of translations all the time. Sometimes we have to exaggerate it so it reads in camera.”
We’ve all seen the “visual effects to performance” comparison (see the bottom of this post), but if there was ever a hope for Serkis to land a nomination for one of his performance capture characters I think that hope has just gone away.
Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere took the issue to director Matt Reeves and received an equally interesting response:
“The subtlety, the emotionality…what you’re responding to is Andy. Andy’s performance is amazing. There’s a version of this movie that’s just Andy on his own with WETA additions, and that version works emotionally. [But] it’s not quite as simple as what you’re saying [about WTA providing digital makeup]. The term ‘digital makeup was to some degree was coined by WETA, but it’s an oversimplification. What WETA does is, they translate what Andy does onto an anatomy of an ape…the WETA guys have to translate what is in Andy’s eyes…what WETA is doing is equally fantastic, but in a different category. This is not done without artistry but their artistry is in taking Andy’s performance and [translating] it into an ape…so ‘translated’ is the term, but it’s no easy task.”
All of this essentially leads to the conclusion (at least for me) that most of the performance is Serkis, but its undeniable the wizards at WETA bring more than enough to the character to understand it’s not just Serkis alone.
When Reeves says, “Their artistry is in taking Andy’s performance and [translating] it into an ape,” I think he’s clearly saying without one there isn’t the other. Serkis doesn’t become Caesar without WETA’s effects the same way Caesar wouldn’t be Caesar without Serkis. I guess the question now is just “enhancing” and “exaggerating” WETA’s artists do before we get what we see on the big screen?
Does this suggest Serkis’ performance isn’t “worthy” of a purely acting Oscar nomination? If you were asking me, I’d say “no”, but I do think the man deserves some recognition because what he’s managed, along with the likes of Toby Kebbel in Dawn, is quite remarkable. His work and dedication has changed the craft and an Honorary Oscar at the very least is very much deserved.
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is in theaters this weekend, you can read my review right here.
